Eyal: With 18...f6, Aronian was apparently being extra-careful in preparing Bd6 - preventing Ne5 after the exchange of bishops. But it turns out to create a fatal weakness along the 7th rank which allows Kramnik's combination to work - for example, 26...Rb7 would lose to 27.Rxc6! Rxb6 28.Rxc8+ Kf7/g7 29.Rc7 winning back the queen and remaining two pawns up (whereas with the pawn on f7, Black would be ok after 28...Kg7).

hedgeh0g: 23.Nxb7!!, while seemingly obvious, was actually a very deep sacrifice. No doubt Aronian saw the sac, but figured it was unsound. My guess is he underestimated the threat posed by White's queenside majority.

Karpova: Fontaine: When you sacrificed a piece, did you already understand that the position is winning?

Kramnik: <Well I thought so, but from another point of view, when you play against such a strong player, you always have doubts maybe he has some ace up his sleeve. When I sacrificed I already saw the situation with Qb6, and all this line with Rb7, Rc6, Rb8, Qb8. I did not really consider Qa8. I thought that after Qa8 I can even play only Kh1 and then B5. But then I calculated b5, the line that I played in the game was not difficult, it was quite simple. I had a feeling that after Ka5 Black’s position is already difficult. I think Rc7 is a mistake. He should have done something else, but Black’s position is already uncomfortable, especially with a pawn on f6. If a pawn would be on f7, something could be done maybe. But f6 pawn is not a fun at all. Then everything worked out tactically.>

Eyal: <solskytz> As I mentioned in a previous post, 26...Rb7 loses to 27.Rxc6! Rxb6 28.Rxc8+ Kf7/g7 29.R(either one)c7 winning back the queen and remaining two pawns up. The queen doesn't have to retreat after 26...Rb8 either - this loses to 27.Qxb8+! Nxb8 28.Rxc7, with the white rooks creating havoc in the black camp.

<Karpova: Fontaine: When I sacrificed I already saw the situation with Qb6>

That's downright astonishing! 26. Qb6 is the type of quiet move that is incredibly hard to find because most players do not even consider it in their list of candidate moves in their calculations. (Apparently, even Houdini did not consider it as well.)

paavoh: @Everett <You are kidding us, right?> Of course not. I did not mean to imply that Nyback-Carlsen was the only prior example. You are right to point out that such or similar sacs can be found earlier. I was just making a note of a recent, rather notable game that I recalled.

Eyal: <(Apparently, even Houdini did not consider it (26.Qb6) as well.)>

An engine automatically considers all the legal moves in a position... and with enough ply-depth Houdini certainly comes to evaluate Qb6 as the best move. But in the position after 21...Rc7 it does take quite a bit of ply-depth (about 20-21 on my engine) to appreciate how strong is 22.Na5, followed some moves later by Qb6 – more than the ply-depth that was provided by the live "computer-kibitzing" on the official site; which is why it wasn’t showing 22.Na5 as top recommendation before Kramnik played the move and people started saying that "the computer didn’t see it". At any rate, the ply-depth needed for the engine to appreciate the strength of 22.Na5 and then 26.Qb6 does indicate the depth of calculation required to make sure this combination works.

NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply.
Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous,
and 100% free--plus, it
entitles you to features otherwise unavailable.
Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should
login now.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.

No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.

No personal attacks against other users.

Nothing in violation of United States law.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page.
This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or
this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages
posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.